Vaddis Holy Grail

[petespin]

ok guys, nice try , but there are some dark poimts that only vaddi could answer , and only with assumptions u go nowhere ,even only a small mistake could lead us at wrong conlusions ,and thats not good at all !

[falkor2k15]

Here's the chip ratio I'm trying in the latest simulation with singles turned on throughout phase 1 and phase 2 based on the 8 spin cycle:

PHASE 1

      &assign(?schips?,1.75)
      &assign(?dchips?,2)

PHASE 2

      &if(?spinx?<38)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,5.25)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<36)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,4.25)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<35)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,4)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<34)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,3.75)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<33)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,3.50)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<25)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,3)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<23)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,2.5)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<18)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,2)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<9)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,1.5)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<6)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,1.25)      
      }
      &if(?spinx?<3)
      {
         &assign(?schips?,1)
         &assign(?dchips?,1)      
      }

Although this is now becoming a progression am I thinking along the right lines or should I be looking more at the tally for each individual set?

Perhaps this could be used as a base, but we can do better still on an individual basis; for example, the worst set was 28:

The Singles/Doubles tally/sequence I haven't analysed, but looking at the general counter there are way too many singles and not enough doubles by spin 37. If we were to change (should have been recognised before spin 37) and bet on doubles only, the next 3 wins all turn out to be doubles!

Attached: +1,500 in 2,000 spins! Note: there's one little bug where the chip values sometimes get swapped between the singles and doubles due to "overcrowding" (will be fixed soon - shouldn't affect the profit a great deal).

I'll look to be moving onto 4 spin cycles next as that might yield more profit and less drawdown.

[RouletteGhost]

Oh my god. Dejavu.

[Tomla021]

vina, vedi , vaddi , vaddi , vaddi

[falkor2k15]

Damn, there's still a small glitch in my code where the singles are being reported as doubles, so I have to re-run the tests after fixing that.

[falkor2k15]

The Singles/Doubles detection is now totally accurate - and guess what(?) - there are now about twice as many singles as doubles!  Full accurate results to be re-posted this afternoon...

I was also pondering that perhaps Vaddi might call 8 singles, 8 doubles or 4 of each - based on both the 4 and 8 spin cycle - depending on the running totals? All options need to be tested.

[atlantis]

Worth bearing in mind what vaddi said:

"You don't even need pen and paper. Simply look at the first set of numbers on the marquee. Although, I do like using my software to watch the beauty of how the numbers fall.

Once you discover the grail, you would be able to spend 5 minutes explaining it to a 10-year-old and if he/she is allowed to play, he/she would make a killing.

BTW, let me emphasize: THIS IS ALL FLAT BETTING.

I'm posting this because I hate to see players barking up the wrong tree and struggling.

Thinking about odds is irrelevant. It's about how the singles and repeats fall.

Once you discover the grail, you'll be thinking:

"No f*ing way. It can't be this simple!" But, it IS that simple!"

So seems not to get too complicated or overthink... we must look for a simple and infallible approach.

A.

[falkor2k15]

Results are in based on a 4 spin cycle with precise singles/doubles detection (8 spin cycle is most likely the same) - and the pattern is now very simple indeed:
8175 / 4722

And each spin is the same from start to finish: about 230 / 130

So Singles are about 1.75 more than Doubles. You would expect them to follow a pattern like this every set:

7   4
14   8
21   12
28   16
35   20

[falkor2k15]

Calling upon the last 8 numbers, instead of 4, gives a different ratio for some reason:
11696 / 8031 = 1.456356618

Otherwise expect the same ratio at any spin number during a set.

[falkor2k15]

Damn, I just discovered there's another bug in the code - this time too many bets are being placed. I need to fix that and then re-run the tests for more accurate ratios. 

[falkor2k15]

OK - after many setbacks - Singles and Doubles are both coming out equal for 4 or 8 spin cycles. Phase 1 has more doubles. Results of the "shape" of each typical set from start to finish will be posted later, but it will probably be equal as well. So what's Vaddi talking about re: relationship between Singles and Doubles and at different stages of the 37 spin cycle? He always bets the last 8 numbers (x1 or x2 as pairs), but that is not within the context of the Law of the Third or in relation to other numbers that are outside this radar. It's like selecting any 8/16 numbers on the board knowing that half of them will hit equally to the other half. Does picking the last 8 that landed play any significance at all for phase 2?

[falkor2k15]

PHASE 1
3365 / 3588   

104   119
195   203
303   324
399   404
477   493
566   625
572   658
749   762

Comments: Doubles slightly ahead of Singles. Most bets won when you have all 8 numbers in play (goes without saying).

PHASE 2 (LAST 4 or 8 NUMBERS)
7424 / 8031 (smaller for 4 NUMBERS)

Roughly equal values for all 37 spins

Comments: Doubles slightly ahead of Singles again. No other patterns.

[falkor2k15]

There's only 2 feasible ways I can imagine playing this system:

PHASE 1

Play only doubles

PHASE 2

Put more chips on doubles and less on singles (based on a 4 spin cycle = max 8 numbers in total)
When the double hits, change to more chips on singles
When 1-1 change to equal chips


PHASE 1

Play only doubles

PHASE 2

Play the last 8 doubles
When the double hits, switch to betting the last 8 singles
When 1-1 change to 4 singles and 4 doubles


Should those methods not yield consistent profit then I give up! I can't see any grail here and it has little to do with the Law of the Third...

[helena]

Thank you RFMAXX for bringing this to our attention.  Amazingly simple concept that has great potential.  I am a big a fan of inside betting and have always thought a Holy Grail would come from it.

[RFMAXX]

Falkor found it. I am only a re-Poster.
I like it too...i think there is something...but like falkor said, it is not running Perfect and there are a lot of Vaddi rules unused. I will rethink it from Time to Time